 |
| Patty squatted down |
So
You Still Don’t Think The Patterson-Gimlin Film Is A Real Sasquatch?
The
Crypto Crew Offers Some Reasons To Reconsider
By TCC Team Member
Dorraine Fisher
It’s
a neverending debate. Is it fact or faked?
But
after the countless scientific studies that have been conducted on the famous
Patterson-Gimlin bigfoot film shot in Bluff Creek, California back in 1967, it
still hasn’t been disproven. But I’m always surprised to find how many people
still believe it’s a hoax. Didn’t several people confess to wearing the suit that
day? Yes, and that makes it easy for some to settle for the idea of it being a
hoax when they don’t know all the facts about the film. The story runs quite a
bit deeper than many imagine.
There
are numerous discrepancies. As the film has been studied over and over again,
many details can be found that point to it being the real deal...if one bothers
to look.
Patty's Toes are seen moving,original frames - photo from Themunnsreport.com
Up
and down movement of the creature’s toes is one. This kind of movement in a
costume isn’t possible. The creature’s calf muscles flex as she walks; also not
possible in a suit. Many have tried to duplicate this muscle movement in a suit
and not accomplished it as yet. And the open and closing motion of the mouth is
not possible if it’s someone wearing a mask. But the biggest problem with the
idea of it being a suit is that human proportions and ape proportions are not
the same. Apes have must longer arms and a much longer upper lip making it
impossible for a human to fit properly into a suit such as the one in the film.
Human arms would be too short and not able to function like a creature, and the
mask would not fit a human properly...and a hoaxer certainly would not be able
to move its mouth in a mask as it struggled with this inconvenience.
Bob
Hieronimous was one of the guys who confessed to wearing the suit that day. But the
subject in the film was found to be at least 6.5 feet tall. Other studies have
showcased the possibility she was closer to 7.5 feet tall. But either way, Bob
H. wasn’t tall enough to wear a suit that big.
Patty's Butt Crack
Another
thing that’s rarely discussed is a portion of the film at the very beginning
when the camera was shaking. Patty was squatted down on the ground, looking for
food, defecating, or drinking or eating. But with a little enhancement to the
film, her butt crack can be seen pretty clearly. This is a strong detail that
wasn’t being created in costumes back in the 1960s. It would have taken a lot
of time and meticulous work to create such a compelling detail.
And
lastly but certainly not least, on examining the ending of the film closer, a
second creature, possibly a male, can be seen moving near the creek bed. It
appears to be moving its arms and then moving its head to look back at Patty.
Is this another guy in a suit? Probably
not. It would be hard enough to create one suit, let alone two. The main focus
has always been on the subject, Patty, so there are many other details of the
film that have been overlooked. *******
DF
Check out these videos for more
details:
[Helpful Sources: The Munns Report , BFRO ,MK Davis]
facebook.com/TheCryptoCrew
Now you can get our blog on your Kindle!
Posts
Does anyone ever compared the patty video to the planet of apes "suits"? Many people i know say: they are able to such suits - just look at the planet of apes movies comming out same time...
ReplyDeleteMight be an interesting comparing.
I LOve POTA! It is my all time favorite movie ...and the suits are horrible compared to Patty....heck the suits are horrible compared to almost anything but the movie is totally awesome..I even have the short lived TV show box set of POTA ..Thanks for the comment
Deleteyes you are right. saying they couldn't make a suit like that in the 60's is pure ignorant. they had very real costumes by the 1930's. look up pictures of gorilla suits on google. it makes me sick how many people take this bs as truth. the patterson family charges 10k everytime someone airs the hoax footage. patterson was a known con artist that owned a bigfoot suit. if you research roger patterson you will find out what type of guy he was. do the math
DeleteThey could not make a suit with the breast movement,nor the calf muscles, or the foot, and one of the best make up artist in the business said their was no way they could of had the technology to make a suit that looks and moves the way it does. But 2 cowboys, with no money, or training, just happen to make the best costume, that was 30 years ahead of it's time? it doesn't walk like we do, especially the angles it creates with it's lower body.
DeleteThey have compared the ape suit to Patty.. Patty is still REAL.
ReplyDeleteno patty was not real. there is a video on youtube from a bf convention where bob gimlin is asked about bob h and he gets super nervous and starts breathing super heavy. anyone trained in spotting liars would know hes lying because of how nervous he got.
Deletelogic dictates if its not a man in a suit then its a live creature...seems like evidence is showing that its high probability its not a person in a costume.. .Bob H.. has proven that hes a liar...thats a fact..
ReplyDeletebob h passed a lie detector, the same lie detector bob gimlin refuses to take. do some research on "dodgy" rodgy patterson, he was a known con artist that was making a motion picture about sasquatch when he ran out of money and ripped off all his investors he came up with the only footage ever of a sasquatch? he owned a sasquatch costume for the movie he was making. how can people be so daft?
Deletecan you post where you found these "facts" about bob h being a liar? bob h passed a lie detector, bob gimlin wont take one. do the math pal. logic dictates that if a known con artist tries to sell you something thats too good to be true its usually not true. you don't think one of the millions of trail cams wouldn't have caught one yet? i asked a fellow from the canadian military that flew over the mountains in bc with the military infra red systems. he said if you have a heartbeat they can see you. that means they can see any living thing even little mice. i asked him if he seen any sign of sasquatchs and he said they seen every type of animal except sasquatch. that being said it is highly unlikely that the creature still exists.
Deletewhat the hell is a lie detector test supposed to prove? You think they are real? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Deleteif a couple of low budget cowboys made a movie of bigfoot sold it and made money from it and hoaxed it...now considering the demand of a current bigfoot footage and what it would be worth today. .others using better and modern resources would of been able to hoax another film like the pgf..though there hasnt been one..because you cant fake the pgf film...because its authentic.
ReplyDeleteno it could easily be done with an old camera, people try that today but it gets picked apart because modern cameras you can tell its fake. give me a crappy old camera and i can make any hoax you want. do some research on roger patterson and see what you think?
DeletePOTA suits were not full body suits , mainly head, hands and feet
ReplyDeletewatch the video closely and you can easily see that there is a belt line. its a badly made suit. arent sasquatch supposed to be in good shape? not built like bob h out of shape.
DeleteFor non-believers, no proof is good enough. They can't wrap their closed minds around it.
DeleteThis Creature, and I believe it is a man in a monkey suit. Is walking like a human too. The one man (Bob Heironimus) insisted that he was in that Bigfoot suit, and passed a lie test too. Patterson,and Gimlin both refused to take a lie detector test.
ReplyDelete